The
European Scrutiny Committee said ministers had refused to schedule
debates on issues such as free movement and the EU's Budget.

It also said BBC coverage of EU matters should be "improved substantially".

The
government said the number of EU debates had doubled since 2009-10,
while the BBC said its coverage was "extensive and impartial".'

It's strange that the BBC concentrates on the criticisms of the government whilst minimising reporting the criticisms of the BBC. The coverage of the BBC's reporting is left to the end of the piece and is just this:

'The committee has also been examining the BBC's coverage of European
issues, taking evidence from director general Lord Hall and head of news
James Harding earlier this month.

During that appearance, Lord
Hall said the desire for balanced output "ran deep" within the BBC and
he believed that this was being achieved.

Mr
Harding said if the public was going to trust the BBC to report on
politicians impartially it had to be clear that BBC journalists weren't
"asked by politicians to come and account for what they do and in effect
do the bidding of those politicians".

But the committee said it
was "concerned about the manner in which the BBC treats EU issues",
calling for coverage to be "improved substantially".

It suggested coverage did not reflect all sides of the debate on the European Union, and more analysis was needed.

Its
chairman, Conservative MP Sir William Cash, said the BBC had "very
particular obligations" to be impartial and to "educate and inform".

He added: "We do not believe this is currently being achieved in the context of the BBC's EU coverage."

A
BBC spokesman said the corporation provided extensive and impartial
coverage of European and Parliamentary issues, and it would be a breach
of the corporation's independence if a committee of MPs instructed the
BBC on its coverage.'

85. Given the fact that the Wilson Report raised
such serious criticisms of the BBC's treatment of EU issues, we
remain profoundly unconvinced that these aims have been fulfilled.

86. We are not yet convinced that the BBC's training
adequately equips BBC editors, correspondents, producers and interviewers
to devise the questions and coverage to reflect all sides of the
EU equation, in accordance with the BBC Charter and its obligations.
We were told by Lord Hall that the organisation is "very
reflective. It thinks very hard about what it is doing …
The culture, I think, is one of questioning", and on the
question of the complexity of the issues in question, we were
told that "the challenge is to say 'this is complex; it matters.
Now we, as journalists, must try to get to grips with it".65F[66]
In our view a good deal more analysis is required. '

And here is the summary:

'90. In summary, we still remain deeply concerned
about the manner in which the BBC treats EU issues. Our witnesses
seemed to be more intent on defending and asserting their own
opinions, mindset and interpretation of the obligations under
the Charter and Framework Agreement than in whether they had in
fact discharged them or whether they had the mindset to carry
through their post-Wilson aims. In the interest of the licence
fee payers, and the public in general, and in the context of the
approaching General Election and a prospective referendum on the
EU, and given the fact that the BBC themselves state that 58%
of the public look to the BBC for news they trust, we believe
that the BBC has a duty under its Charter, Framework Agreement
and the general law, and following the Wilson report in particular,
to improve substantially the manner in which it treats EU issues.

91. Furthermore, we conclude that in the light
of the evidence we have taken over the past two years from the
BBC, and given the statements made by the Chairman of the BBC
Trust, Rona Fairhead, indicating that even she, as Chairman of
the Trust, wishes to see reform of governance, that our criticisms
of the way the BBC treats EU issues, and the approach by its leaders
to the Committee, particularly the initial refusal to give oral
evidence, shows that accountability to Parliament must be a key
factor to be considered as part of the review of the BBC Charter
in 2016, as should be strict adherence to the aims set out by
the BBC in its response to the Wilson Review.

92. We have already published the transcripts of
both hearings, and we also publish a submission from the organisation
Newswatch commenting on the session with the Chairman of the BBC
Trust, the BBC's response to that submission (which in our view
is dismissive), and the BBC's follow-up submission following the
oral evidence session with Lord Hall.

93. We deeply
regret the fact that Lord Hall's repeated refusals to give oral
evidence delayed the session to such an extent that it has not
been possible to conduct further work on these issues before the
dissolution of Parliament. Our central tenet, regarding the BBC's
coverage of the EU scrutiny process in the House, and EU issues
more generally, is that the country's public service broadcaster
must command wide confidence in its coverage of such a sensitive
and complex issue. We do not believe that this has been achieved.

94. Given the
possibility of a referendum on the UK's EU membership before the
end of the decade, and potentially a renegotiation of the Treaties,
the issue of how the media in general, and the BBC in particular,
covers the EU is of paramount importance. We asked Lord Hall if,
as Director-General, he would undertake to appear before our successor
Committee, and he responded that "if the subject matter was
one that involved the BBC in some sort of way, I or others would
appear." We welcome this commitment.'

That the Committee concluded:

'..we still remain deeply concerned
about the manner in which the BBC treats EU issues. Our witnesses
seemed to be more intent on defending and asserting their own
opinions, mindset and interpretation of the obligations under
the Charter and Framework Agreement than in whether they had in
fact discharged them or whether they had the mindset to carry
through their post-Wilson aims. In the interest of the licence
fee payers, and the public in general, and in the context of the
approaching General Election and a prospective referendum on the
EU, and given the fact that the BBC themselves state that 58%
of the public look to the BBC for news they trust, we believe
that the BBC has a duty under its Charter, Framework Agreement
and the general law, and following the Wilson report in particular,
to improve substantially the manner in which it treats EU issues.'

should be reported by the BBC but the BBC is not interested in facts or impartiality, it has its own agenda to further.

Where in the World - visitors since 16 May 2009

Copyright Information

All articles on this web site are copywrited by the author.

Some of the images and video on thus web site have been created by the author, others come from friends, public domain files, are used with permission, embedded from the original web site, or are legally displayable thumbnails. The author gives full permission to anyone to use anything from this site however they wish, as long as the items are not altered in order to deceive others or change their meaning, and they are attributed to the author or this web site.